Archive | Pension Time Bomb RSS feed for this section

Not sure what happened with the trash tax, but it looks like the money will be going to the roads. Or something.

9 Sep

I’ve been busy lately but I’ve been trying to keep an ear to the trash tax discussion. You may have seen my letter in the Enterprise Record recently:

Next week Chico city council will discuss how the trash tax will be spent. While they promised to fix the streets with the new revenue, staff has listed “Priority 1” as “Fixed cost increases, such as built-in contract escalators, benefit increases outside City control including CalPERS pension contributions”. 

I am quoting directly from the staff report, available at the city website, with the city council agenda for September 5, 2017. 

“Priority 2:  Funding significant long-term liabilities, and replenishing General Fund and Emergency Reserve, Workers Compensation, General Liability, and Compensated Absences funds to established targets”  Employee costs, and money into the General Fund, which can be spent without the restrictions placed on other funds. 

“Priority 3:  Replenishing internal service funds, such as Vehicle Replacement, Building Maintenance” So, staff get new cars and upgrades in their office buildings?

Finally we get to “Priority 4: Discretionary expenditures and negotiable items.”  That would be, fixing city streets, cleaning up Bidwell Park, and dealing with increasing crime? Negotiable? As usual, public service is the lowest priority for staff. 

Let’s call this “franchise fee” what it is: The Big Lie

And get ready – next they will come at you by way of your toilet – sewer fees are going up, and so are septage pumping fees. All to pay down the pension and benefits liabilities.

David Little wrote a similar, but nicer editorial, we agreed – $taff told us this money would go to fixing the streets, and now they try to pull a bait-and-switch, trying to spend it on their own pensions. That’s called “fraud” and it’s illegal, at least in the private sector.

So, no wonder city mangler Mark Orme was just a little defensive in his opening remarks, saying there were other options, mentioning what was said in the newspaper – hey, Mister, I quoted from the agenda report you approved and signed. Here’s the preceding headers I left out of my letter:

Pursuant to the Council’s Budget Policies, the following [4 “Priorities” listed above] would be followed by staff without Council earmarking.
D.1.a. The City will dedicate new ongoing revenue sources in the following manner and priority·

In fact, road work and maintenance were the last “options” under “Options to Consider” Read the report here:

http://chico-ca.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=271&meta_id=56052

Mark Orme needs to go.   Having given and heard numerous reports about our financial situation, Orme still demanded a $9,000 raise to cover his increased pension payment – still less than 10 percent of his total package – still expecting to get 70 percent of over $220,000 in salary in retirement. 

But I was shocked with the conversation that followed. Sean Morgan and Andrew Coolidge refused Orme’s proposal and made a motion to dedicate the money to road work. I tried to type as I listened.

Morgan: I understand we have our own policy about what to do with new money… a continued discussion about how many trucks were on the road…how much damage that was doing.. no question the roadways are bad…biggest thing we deal with after unfunded pensions…allocate most of not all of that increase into roadways…in the report two line items for road maintenance…that was my initial thought…we could hire we could hire we could hire …. staff has done an incredible job of [lowering costs]…that doesn’t work when it comes to  repaving roadways...[mentions a group that wants a sales tax to fix roads]…

Stone: [admits the streets are bad]  I’m kind of comfortable dedicating for a year some amount…I’m uncomfortable about dedicating this long term, I don’t like to tie our hands…

Sometimes I think Stone should be bound and gagged, but I’ll admit, that’s not very nice. I will say I’m uncomfortable with him having a free hand to the til.

Sorensen: I think any action we take is only good as long as we take it…everything in the budget is up for grabs… my preference would be capital [improvements] … there would be much more grant opportunities [if we had matching funds dedicated].

Ann: things we really need…certainly roads is definitely a need…however we have an opportunity to at least start to pay for the permitting system that would certainly help streamline permitting process [more money for city]  … interpretive program for our park… 3 priorities – roads, permitting, parks.

Coolidge then asked for public comment.  

Sales tax increase advocate Stephanie Taber commented that the “$200,000 – $600,000” expected in the first year of the franchise is inadequate – “what’s that going to do for that $7 million we have missing [$taff indicated roadwork might cost up to $10 million a year, and there’s nothing in the road or capital improvements funds] …you guys have got to grab hold of the fact we haven’t got any money… the thing we need to fix [is that we are] millions of dollars behind in many things we really need…you really need to come up with a long term plan. I am very much in favor of the tax increase, I don’t see any problem whatsoever I think it’s the best thing for our city.  My 2 cents.”

Local businessman Mike Reilly commented that “most or all should go to capital…” with “50 percent toward the roads.” But he also opined that streamlining the permitting system “ is a one time [$250,000] cost and will help immediately.”  He believes it would save the cost of another employee, paying for itself within a couple of years. For this reason Reilly felt the franchise revenue should be “looked at on a yearly basis…but I don’t think we should pay PERS or add salaries…”   Adding police officers was one of the first “options” listed in the $taff report.

Coolidge:  Certainly there’s a long list of things we need…but at the end of the day I recall all our conversations about the franchise agreement…over and over…almost all my colleagues spoke to the fact that they were were doing this because of the impacts the trucks have on the roads and the roads had been neglected…personally I’d like to see it [the franchise revenues] locked up forever…the problem we get into is when funds aren’t locked up...[makes a motion to dedicate the entire amount toward “the roads”]…”for the period of the first year…”

Here I had a problem – for the first year?  Sounds like a trick! Luckily Morgan moved in with a “friendly amendment.” 

Sean: I absolutely agree with the motion..my fear is if we only do it for a year…we’ll be whacking the mole, we never end up getting anything…I would support your motion but I’d rather see it all go into road capital for a period of 5 years.

Then Sorensen tried to address another concern of mine – what fund are we talking about? There seems to be a road fund, a capital improvements fund – I haven’t been to the meetings lately, and they’ve changed everything.

Sorensen: I was going to add, it’s not clear, is it capitol or road maintenance he wants? [if] we can’t lock it in, we could vote to change it in two months…we should take it up as a budget item…

Morgan seems to agree with Sorensen, but poo-poos his concern about the possibility of an overturn of the decision. Morgan said he wanted the money “earmarked” so it wouldn’t “just end up in the General Fund,” where it can be spent with little or no restriction as to purpose. 

So, what’s the legal term here, earmarked? Dedicated? This is never explained fully to the public, and that’s how they get away with moving this money like carnival barkers.

But Morgan opined that any council member(s) who tried to overturn this decision “would have to stand up to the community…”

Ooooo, you’re scarin’ me now!

 

So I don’t really understand the motion they eventually made, I guess I will have to look at it when Her Royal Clerk posts the minutes on the website. They seemed to be saying both the capital and road funds, but they seemed as confused as I was. Presson didn’t read anything back, she just called for the vote. I don’t know if that’s appropriate – it sure doesn’t give anybody a chance to ask about the motion, whether they understand it or not, and I’m telling you, these people are not the sharpest pencils in the box. The clerk has made mistakes before – the most expensive being the motion that first passed for the scrap yard – and the council seem to follow with their noses to her behind without thinking about stuff.

The motion passed with Ory absent, and Schwab and Stone dissenting. 

Robert Marbut fails to address a public sector that looks at “the homeless” as cash cows

5 Sep

Yesterday an old post got an unusual amount of traffic.

https://chicotaxpayers.com/2016/02/02/its-good-to-see-people-asking-questions-about-funding-torres-shelter/

Reading this morning’s paper, I see why –

http://www.chicoer.com/social-affairs/20170904/chico-homelessness-to-do-list-revisited-a-year-after-robert-marbuts-visit

Here’s the article from last year –

http://www.orovillemr.com/article/NB/20160923/NEWS/160929822

I don’t think any of the agencies here took Marbut very seriously. This is what Marbut failed to address – a public sector that looks at these people like cash cows. 

 

Tags:

Loyalton Calif cuts pensions – why can’t Chico do same?

27 Aug

Thanks to Jim for picking up this article, from the Los Angeles Times, about a little town not far from Chico.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-loyalton-calpers-pension-problems-20170806-htmlstory.html

I think we have a similar situation here. Early in the 2000’s, a city council including current county supervisors Maureen Kirk and Larry Wahl, at the behest of then city manager Tom Lando, signed an MOU with city employees, attaching salaries “to revenue increases, but not decreases…”  

Staff then went on a permits binge, permitting development all over town, houses piled into Grandma’s back yard, raising city revenues and salaries along with them. Staff got 14, 19, 22 percent raises over a very short period.  Lando’s own salary went from around $65,000 a year to over $120,000 a year within a very short time. 

When this scam was figured out by the public, they stopped it, but started paying the “employer paid member contribution” –  the city started paying most, even all of the employee’s pension share.

We’ve been screeching about that, so lately they just  raise the employee’s salary to cover their new pension share – they are determined that the taxpayer will foot the bill for these pensions (the following list is from 2012, remember, these people get cost of living increases) :

https://chicotaxpayers.com/2012/01/30/heres-why-lando-wants-to-raise-your-sales-tax/

Tom Lando hasn’t been pumping the sales tax increase lately, but I’m sure he’s behind it. Lately, in his position as Chico Area Recreation District Board member, he’s been pushing for a bond on our homes. It doesn’t matter which agency gets the money, as long as they pay their CalPERS deficit with it. 

Loyalton only had four employees – can we do the same thing? I think we can sue the city for the outrageous raises given these pensioneers – spiking – right before they retired, like Lando. But I’m not a lawyer. 

What do you think? 

City facing $178,075,000 in unfunded street projects, less than $2 million in the street improvements fund

18 Aug

Speaking of the proposed sales tax increase – “to fix the roads” – here’s another knee slapper – the city needs over $178 million to bring our streets up to standard, just to mitigate the effects of new construction. Here’s the link to that report in next weeks Finance Committee agenda.

http://www.ci.chico.ca.us/document_library/minutes_agendas/finance_committee/8-23-17FinanceCommitteeAgendaPacket.pdf

Right now city staff is wrestling with developers like Bill Webb, who feel the city is expecting too much of the money to come out of new construction fees.

The report is difficult to understand, but what I’m guessing is, they don’t want to pay the “Urbanization” fee at all, they think the taxpayers should have to pay to fix the streets. But, I’ll give it to staff – they make a very good argument, pointing out the obvious – new development, especially these high density subdivisions that are going into Grandma’s backyard all over town again, generate more traffic and the developers/homebuyers who build them should have to pay for the added impacts.

What about the proposed sales tax increase?  Taber admitted, “The city would only raise 4 to 4.5 million per year if they increased the sales tax by a quarter cent. ” 

Well, like I said – $4.5 million compared to $178 million – that’s a little tiny bubble of spit on a great big griddle.  According to the Finance Committee report linked above, just one of five currently approved projects – a stretch of Humboldt Road that has been heavily impacted by new development – will cost over $6 million. Other’s ranged between $800,000 and just over $2 million.  

But, $4.5 million would cover the increasing amount CalPERS is demanding to cover our pension deficit – $800,000 now, expected to increase to $1.5 million within the next three years, and on up from there.  Meanwhile, Chico City Council is handing out raises that increase the deficit while refusing to ask employees to pay more out of their own paycheck.

Tsk, tsk, get good tires on your car.

 

 

 

 

Who wants to go to the CARD meeting with me tomorrow night?

16 Aug

When I ran into Mayor Sean Morgan at LaMalfa’s community meeting, he asked me, “Where have you been?!”

Morgan and I have kind of a Junior High School relationship – like many other members of our local government, he would like to put my head in a toilet, but in a light-hearted, good sported kind of way.

The guy loves to argue, but he’s never screamed “Bullshit” or “Shut Up!” at me. 

That said, as I told him, I almost never agree with anything he does. He voted with council to give Mark Orme a $9,000 raise to cover Orme’s new pension share, having heard the pension deficit is poised to send us into bankruptcy. 

I guess I should have answered him, “Where have you been? On another fucking planet?”

A planet where everybody has a public salary and a public pension, and money  grows on trees…

But given the spirit of LaMalfa’s meeting, I decided, us two old porch dogs should give the public an example of how to be civil to somebody you’d cross the street to avoid, but they happen to be standing between you and the exit.  

This does not affect my feelings that Morgan needs to go. He’s just a shill for the public employees. 

Where have I been? Well, I don’t get paid to go to meetings, I get paid to work. Sometimes I have to do a job that’s beyond a 58 year old woman, and I get a work related injury.  I have sprained my back, it feels like somebody kicked me right between my shoulder blades, really, really hard. It only hurts when I sit up, walk, reach my arms out, or breathe.

Actually, it hurts all the time, but who am I to complain – if you are in pain, you are still alive. That which does not kill you, will only make you stronger and bitchier.

CARD has a meeting tomorrow night. They will undoubtedly discuss their plans to put a bond on our homes. My husband can’t take me, and I can’t make it by myself. Any takers?

Tags: ,

The new trash deal is going to stink

14 Aug

Tomorrow Chico City Council will finalize the trash deal. I’ve read and commented on it for years now, this latest draft still has a lot of problems.

  • they will require everybody to pay for a yard waste bin
  • if bins are damaged, including graffitti, more than once, the customer is on the hook for the replacement of the bin – no prices included, we have to wait til our bin is damaged to find out
  • no rates published, but Waste Management is allowed to raise our rates at will with the CPI

Right now my family pays about $25 for a 96 gallon bin which we share with our tenants. Nobody would tell me what the new rates would be, but I’ve checked in other towns – we should expect to pay $25 for a 35 gallon bin under the new deal, so the bigger bins will be closer to $35 and $50 a month. Plus the additional whatever for the yard waste bin. Recycling will also be required, but free. 

I’ve howled about this deal, which former mayor Mark Sorensen called a “trash tax.” I don’t think the public will pay attention until they get their new bills. We’ll see what kind of stink rises up over Chico when people find out, trash service will not be mandatory under this  deal, just a lot more expensive!

Hi Council,

I just wanted a few last words before you hit us with  the trash tax.

I won’t pay for a yard waste bin I don’t need. I’ve got rentals, I do my own yard work and hauling, I pay to take the stuff to the green waste facility on Cohasset, so I shouldn’t have to pay for yard waste bins for tenants who don’t do any yard work.   Besides, why should I have to have a third truck stop in front of my property, every week?

Also, they should have to tell us how much these bins cost, UP FRONT, if they are going to require us to replace them when they get damaged/tagged. That also makes the yard waste bin a liability I don’t need.

Waste Management should also have a rate schedule on their website that is good for a year. When I tried to sign up for Waste Management earlier this year, the dispatcher gave me old rates, and told me she had no idea what the rates would be when the franchise takes effect in October. That’s called “bait and switch”.

Thank you  for your anticipated cooperation – Juanita Sumner, Chico

 

Tags: ,

The city budget is just a suggestion! See how they appropriate our money into their own pockets

13 Aug

The city of Chico posts the budget online:

http://www.chico.ca.us/finance/documents/2016-17CityAnnualFINALBudget.pdf

But the budget isn’t set in stone, rather merely a suggestion.  Every month you will find appropriations – departments go over budget, and council just routinely approves mo’ money, mo’ money, mo’ money.  The memo below is on this coming week’s council agenda, available here,

http://chico-ca.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=270

Here we have an appropriation for the fire department – oftentimes it’s either cops or fire. The chief has given us a “partial” list of “unanticipated” costs, without any explanation. What, for example, did Chico Fire have to do with the “Oroville Spillway Incident”? What were they doing at the Santos Fire?

And how could we miss – $73,000 for “Unanticipated Retirements and Lay-offs”?

This is how they fritter our money, right under our noses.  This is why the state has their nose up our ass for fraud.

Meeting Date: 8/15/17
TO: City Council
FROM: Bill Hack, Fire Chief
RE:  FY2016-17 Supplemental Appropriation/Budget Modification No. 2017-FD-004

REPORT IN BRIEF:

Throughout a fiscal year there are unanticipated costs incurred by the Fire Department. These costs are generally
associated with emergency response to large incidents or multiple medium sized incidents within the City of Chico,
unanticipated retirements or long-term absences, and other anomalies. The Department attempts to absorb all
unanticipated costs in the current adopted budget. However, depending upon the timing and/or amount of the
unanticipated costs it is often impossible to do so.

For Fiscal Year 2016-17, the Fire Department incurred at least $192,000 in unplanned expenses. The Department
was able to absorb approximately half of the unanticipated costs, but due to the magnitude and timing of the events
the department was unable to absorb $101,602 in expenses

A partial list of the unanticipated Fire Department costs for Fiscal Year 2016-17 is included below:

Oroville Spillway Incident (Partial Reimbursement Pending) – $25,000
Santos Fire – $20,000
Pay-outs for Unanticipated Retirements and Lay-offs – $73,000
Fire Investigations (Complex) – $10,000
Retroactive Salary Payments due to a processing error (2015-Present) – $27,000
Emergency Call-Back Coverage – $12,000
Other (Long-term Leave) – $25,000

 

 

Tags:

Sales Tax Increase Anyone?

30 Jul

Taber’s letter

Letter: No mismanagement of city finances under new staff

POSTED: 07/27/17, 1:53 AM PDT 

0 COMMENTS

 

The headline read, “Chico government can’t be trusted with tax increase.” The letter implied current city management is deceitful in its handling of city finances. Nothing could be further from the truth. If the letter writer attended monthly Finance Committee meetings, any accusation of supposed mishandling of taxpayer monies could be explained. I know, I attend those meetings.

Since our new management staff (Mark Orme, city manager, Chris Constantin, assistant city manager, Scott Dowell, administrative services director, and Barbara Martin, deputy director-finance) took office many positive changes in financial reporting have taken place. Detailed financial reports are presented at both the committee meeting and at City Council meetings. Those reports are published online for all to see and pick apart if the public chooses. I cannot recall the letter writer coming forward with a question, comment, or criticism this entire year.

Most of the letter seemed focused on past majority driven ultra-liberal councils (2004-2012) and the old management team that was either unwilling or incapable of controlling their spending. Things have changed dramatically. All it took was one conservative council member and the Grand Jury report of May 2013 to shed light on the mismanagement of taxpayers’ money.

I have no misgivings in suggesting that the city raise sale tax by one-quarter of 1 percent (7.25 percent to 7.50 percent) equaling $4-$4.5 million annually. I will gladly pay that extra 12 cents on a $50 purchase if that meant we could repair/replace our hazardous city streets in this century.

— Stephanie L. Taber, Chico

 

My response to Taber, e-mailed 7/29/17 (we’ll see if this is printed, ER staff removed similar comments I made on Taber’s letter )
We have been assured that all Chico’s financial problems have been put to bed under our “new” staff.  
Former finance director and current assistant city manager Chris Constantin instituted the policy by which whenever a fund is in deficit money is “administratively” transferred from other funds. For example, the gas tax, which most people believe is dedicated to road repairs and improvements is routinely “allocated” for  salaries, pensions and benefits, just like when Jennifer Hennessy was our finance director.
Current administrative services (finance) director Scott Dowell was with Chico Area Recreation District when they failed to make recommended repairs to Shapiro Pool, instead spending $400,000 on a “side fund payoff” to CalPERS.   When he left that agency CARD had over $1.7 million in pension deficit for less than 35 employees, despite spending over $300,000/year in regular payments.

The city’s pension and benefits liability is now over $180 million, and the state is demanding an escalating payment scale. Meanwhile, we continue to pay the majority of our employee benefits, giving them raises to cover their increased shares.  We will never get out of our financial morass until our management staff agrees to pay 50 percent of their own pensions and benefits without corresponding salary increases to cover it.

A quarter cent sales tax increase would be spit on a griddle.

Juanita Sumner, Chico

Tags:

You heard it in the Enterprise Record: “Chico Government Can’t Be Trusted with Tax Increase”

22 Jul

I wrote a letter to the paper in response to Stephanie Taber’s suggestion of raising sales tax to support salaries and benefits Downtown, it ran yesterday, now it’s gone! You have to know it was there and search it! How LOW will they GO?

That’s how Dave Little treats people he doesn’t agree with, he just squelches their letters.  He’s a very “Little” man, his testicles have to be put in the microwave every morning.

So, I ain’t proud – here’s the link:

http://www.chicoer.com/opinion/20170720/letter-chico-government-cant-be-trusted-with-tax-increase

And here’s the letter:

A letter writer has suggested a sales tax increase to “fix a couple of major roads a year”.   

Chico has reached financial crisis because of employee overcompensation.  In 2013,  third-party auditors found a $15 million deficit. Council cut workers and services, while raising management compensation to unprecedented levels. By October of 2016 we were one of six cities in California being investigated for fraud, having exhausted our emergency fund and outspent revenues for six years.. We are still on the state’s “watch list”.  

To avoid further audit, staff cooked up an “aggressive” repayment plan, purporting to raise employees’ share of compensation costs. But the increased shares came with salary increases that more than covered the new CalPERS shares.  According to publicpay.gov, the city now has a $180 million deficit and will soon be paying more than a million a year to beat it down. 

According to California Policy Center, “As Chico recovers, new development projects have been downsized to reflect the city’s long-term financial reality.”   Staff has spent all the money on management pensions and benefits, there’s no money left for road base, asphalt, or  qualified workers needed to fix the roads. 

Proponents of a tax increase measure say the money will be dedicated to the roads – don’t believe it. Staff has instituted a “fund allocation” policy – they move money from one fund to another like peas under walnut shells. 

Juanita Sumner, Chico CA

 

It’s sad to me that we have such poor media here, Dick Little and Melissa Dogtree are just government shills. We have a council that plays lackey to the staffers who are ripping us off because all but one member of our council either get public  pensions or are married to one. 

Tags: , , ,

Humboldt Fire caused by transients?

21 Jul

You have probably heard about the 100 acre Humboldt (Road) fire that occurred along Hwy 32, just above California Park and the new Forgarty houses on the other side of the road. It came within yards of Cal Water’s new tank.

When my husband and I drove out on Hwy 32 yesterday, we saw that it came from the area where we had reported illegal camping a few months ago.  There was a tent with a tarp, clearly visible from Hwy 32. When we investigated we found a fire pit surrounded with garbage and scattered household goods. The fire pit was well established, lined with rocks gathered from the surrounding hillside.  The site looked as though it was regularly used for years, and very recently.

We reported it and were referred to Office Scott Zuchin, who told us he hadn’t seen any camp there. He offered to set up a neighborhood meeting, but when I persisted in my complaint he got testy. 

Please be more specific then. We may not be speaking about the same location. You may attach photographs to your email if that helps.

I had given him the exact location, and told him it was visible from Hwy 32.  I don’t think these people read an e-mail completely before they respond. Shortly thereafter, the tent and tarp disappeared, but the campsite was never cleaned up.  We saw signs of illegal camping all along Humboldt road, in the exact vicinity of that 100 acre fire, and aside from a poorly organized last minute clean-up of the road by a private group for the Wildflower Century, there have been no attempts made by any city or county agency to clean the garbage out of that area.

I had cc’d  Third District Supervisor Maureen Kirk into that discussion because she lives in Cal Park. She is fully aware of the transient camps along Humboldt Road and complained about crime being on the increase in Cal Park. This woman needs to wake up and get off the pot – she’s up for re-election in 2018 and doesn’t have a clue as to the problems she is causing every time she votes to fund some “homeless” program. The county brings these people in here for the stipend attached – $550 a day to pay down a pension debt that has them cutting  staff and closing fire stations. But to these agencies money is like an ice cube in hell – it’s already gone to management salaries and pensions before it even hits  the floor.

Write to Kirk and tell her she has to do something to stop the flood of insanity she’s turned loose on our town – that’s mkirk@buttecounty.net

Tags: , , , ,

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →